Seaweed, we're also getting nowhere. I have my arguments, you have yours, let's end this, because you're not gonna convince me otherwise in this matter.
-
Comment -
A good way to know when your being lied to is when they laugh.
When you make someone uncomfortable by exposing their lies with the truth, they will mock you for it.
When all else fails, they get angry.
All works of the devil.Comment -
Yeah Jesus.... I'm 100% mocking you and laughing about you. That's basically all there is to do with overly religious monkeys. Guess I'm Satan. Cool story. Now please: one of you donkeys should tell me again that I will burn in hell. I'm shivering....Comment -
Id like to revisit this. If your life did not belong to God, then why are so many things regarding your life completely out of your control? Your life is yours in that you are given free will, but if it was truly yours then why didn't you create yourself? You had no decision on your part whether you would be born a male or female, what you would look like, where you were born, whether you were rich or poor, who would be your parents, or numerous other things. Also, if this life was yours then why couldn't you get whatever you wanted? How come you cant win the lottery just because you wish for it to happen, how come sometimes no matter how much effort you put into it you don't make the team, don't get the job, something unexpected happens in your life?
Its because this life that you have is not yours but a gift from God. God has a plan and purpose for every one of us, and if you can finally let go and quit trying to do things your own way and start doing it Gods way he wants for us then you will finally find the fulfilling happiness and life that you have been looking for.Comment -
1) Jesus says to repent from sin or you will go to hell (contradicting "once saved always saved" theology.)
"And if thy right hand scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell." (Matthew 5:30)
2) Jesus says you must eat His flesh and drink His blood or you will not have eternal life.
In John 6:54, Jesus switches from the Greek work phago (meaning "eat") to the more graphic word trogo (meaning "chew" or gnaw") to leave no doubt that Jesus was telling us to chew His flesh.
And guess when Jesus changes His word from phago to trogo? He changes it when the Jews expressed their disbelief in His command to eat His flesh! Why would Jesus (immediately after their disbelief) choose to speak in terms of chewing if (according to you) that's not what he meant? It's irrational and absurd. I could go into SO MUCH MORE Biblical proof if you want, but this evidence should suffice.
3) Jesus says Peter is the rock of the Church.
Peter was symbolized as leader at the very beginning of his relationship with Christ by the fact that Jesus changes his name from Simon to Peter which translates as "Rock"! Why would Christ change his name to rock? hmm? maybe it's because Peter is the rock of the Church? Since Peter means rock, this verse can be translated as follows......
"That thou art Rock; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18)
DON'T EVEN GIVE ME THE PETRA VS PETROS ARGUMENT.
The dialect spoken in the first century A.D. was Koine Greek. In this dialect, Petra and Petros are SYNONYMS. OK?
The reason for a difference is that Petra is a female name, and Peter is a man. You couldn't give Peter a female name, so they used the synonym Petros. Peter is the rock that Jesus refers too. Jesus then gives Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven which represent authority that only Peter had.
I PROVED PROTESTANTISM WRONG WITH ONLY THREE SIMPLE POINTS.
I PROVED CATHOLICISM AS THE ONE TRUE FAITH.
THERE ARE MANY MORE TOPICS I COULD GO INTO, BUT THESE THREE ARE SOME OF THE BIG ONES.
May God bless you.Comment -
1) Peter was the Bishop of Rome before he died, there are many quotes I could cite from the early Christians showing that it was a known fact that Peter went to Rome.
2) Peter gets martyred in Rome.
3) His successor becomes the Bishop of the city he died in which is Rome.
4) His successor receives his authority in the symbol of the keys of the kingdom of heaven given to Peter by Jesus Himself.
5) The successor eventually becomes known as Pope by the faithful.
Now comes the question of apostolic succession. Is it Biblical?
Yes.
Read Acts 1: 12-26.
"Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk[a] from the city. 13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[b] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
20 “For,” said Peter, “it is written in the Book of Psalms:
“‘May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,’[c]
and,
“‘May another take his place of leadership.’[d]
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles."
Notice that they replace Judas with his successor. Also notice that Peter was in charge of who the successor would be (evidence of him being the leader of the apostles). If the apostles felt the need to replace the man who betrayed Christ, how much more would they fell the need to replace a good apostle, their leader Peter?
1) I proven apostolic succession.
2) It's a fact that Peter went to Rome and that His bones are in Rome under St. Peters basilica. I will quote an early Church Father. This was written in 367 A.D.
"You cannot deny that you are aware that in the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]—of all the apostles; the one chair in which unity is maintained by all" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [A.D. 367]).
3) It's a fact that Peter had the keys of the kingdom of heaven which his successor would inherit.
So, in light of the facts, it's undeniable that the Papacy is Biblical.Comment -
Whoa my Brother!!! You did not prove anything at all! There are plenty of scriptures to back up perseverance of the saints, that the last supper sacrament is just bread, and that the church is not brick and walls. I have an exam I'm taking in the morning or I would spend about an hour on a response, but it can wait until tomorrow.Comment -
The teaching of Jesus in the sixth chapter of John's Gospel is very clear: "Amen, amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood you do not have life within you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food and My blood is true drink. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me and I in him" (John 6:53-56).
John goes on to say that, even though many disciples would not accept this teaching and went away, Jesus did not attempt to bring them back by saying He was only speaking symbolically.
The early Church took this teaching seriously. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Saint Paul says, "Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the Body and Blood of the Lord... for anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgement on himself." (1 Corinthians 11:27, 29) Paul's statement makes sense only if the bread and wine have become the real Body and Blood of Christ.Comment -
Read the Greek and how when the disciples heard him say to eat His flesh and drink His blood, they could not understand it. If Jesus was speaking figuratively he would of said it. But he did NOT. He could have said you don't actually do it. He says it 4 times to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Most left when they heard him but Jesus turned to the 12 disciples and asked do you also wish to go away? to leave? and Peter speaks up and says to whom shall we go? They say they have come to believe. Peter didn't understand but he knew the one who did and that was enough for him. It is more than a symbol it is a REALITY. He really expects people to eat His flesh and drink His blood.
"Whatever else might be said, the early Church took John 6 literally. In fact, there is no record from the early centuries that implies Christians doubted the constant Catholic interpretation. There exists no document in which the literal interpretation is opposed and only the metaphorical accepted.
Why do Fundamentalists and Evangelicals reject the plain, literal interpretation of John 6? For them, Catholic sacraments are out because they imply a spiritual reality—grace—being conveyed by means of matter. This seems to them to be a violation of the divine plan. For many Protestants, matter is not to be used, but overcome or avoided.
One suspects, had they been asked by the Creator their opinion of how to bring about mankind’s salvation, Fundamentalists would have advised him to adopt a different approach. How much cleaner things would be if spirit never dirtied itself with matter! But God approves of matter—he approves of it because he created it—and he approves of it so much that he comes to us under the appearances of bread and wine, just as he does in the physical form of the Incarnate Christ."Last edited by Seaweed; 02-11-14, 01:09 AM.Comment -
Scripture only source and not Tradition?
Where does it teach the Bible alone? 2nd Timothy 3:16? It does not say ONLY scripture. Read it carefully. Matthew 15 Jesus condemns only HUMAN tradition.
Paul says to hold fast to the TRADITIONS you receive from us either by writing (SCRIPTURE) or word of mouth (TRADITION).
Where does the bible teach it is the only authority? That is your presumption even though it does not teach it.
Read up on Scott Hahn, a Protestant Minister turned Catholic.Comment -
Bible = Rule Book for the feeble minded thousands of years ago.
If there is or ever was a "God" that knows of our existence, he most certainly would have never let mankind invent the internet.Comment -
At last, the biggest argument between Catholics and conservative fundamentalist Protestants. What is most important the bible or laws made basically by early Catholics. They are both man made laws even though most Protestants believe the bible was written by inspired by God humans. This is a huge argument between the P and C both have valid points but I think in the long run the Protestants have to win this argument. If a certain holy book is the foundation of a religion how can man change what is written in the book. One very famous example and just about every denomination changed this law. The bible states very clearly to keep holy the sabbath that is a 100% fact. Well very few denominations do that, I can think of only one but probably more. The sabbath is beyond a doubt Saturday, look it up if you don't believe me. Most Christians with the exception of the Seventh Day Adventists worship and keep holy Sunday. A absolute disregard for the commandment. How did that happen? A bunch of catholics decided that the day of resurrection was more important than the Sabbath? They changed the Jewish and more importantly the bible teaching.Comment -
I have to disagree with most of this and don't want to reveal my sources.
When we are home or the afterlife we are always learning and sometimes need actual physical living to fulfill a learning
experience. For those who die young are here to help a loved one in some way.
From what I understand, yes you chose how you want to look, who your parents are and your life plan for yourself.
If you want to feel humility, you will come as JJGold (no offense to JJ, but that is his life plan).
Our life here has been planned by us before we got here. With the help of our spirit guides and of course the life force
we call god. But of course you can change some of your plan as you go. Our main objective is to learn and feel.
Believe me, you are never alone or without gods life force. You are constantly surrounded by spirit guides protecting
you. Some may appear in person or in dreams, but only if you need them.
I know murders, rape, car crashes and the like are horrendous, but they are actually how the people wanted to die.
You have 3 outs, like baseball. Each time one of those outs come up, you have a choice to continue with life or go
home. I'm sure most here has a story to share why they are still alive and not dead.
Just some food for thought.Comment -
Well, that's just a matter of deriving from a basis, which is: do you believe in God? You believe in God, I don't, so I don't acknowledge it's existence, which will never be proven and Bible isn't one of those things, which can prove it. It's like saying well, Hanging Gardens of Babylon were created by Nebuchadnezzar II, but you can't prove it, because there is so much lack of evidence.
Why are so many things out of control? Because the people write their own destiny and unfortunately sometimes, other people write destinies for others as well.
Why I didn't create it myself? Because mother nature created it, not God, but unfortunately some people fail to respect the works of nature and is already starting with its vengeance.
Why do people don't get whatever they wanted? Because people's capabilities and characters vary and are limited.
How can't I win the lottery? Because at my local lottery, there is 1:15.000.000 chance to win a jackpot or there is approx. a chance 1:50.000.000 to win Eurojackpot. It's called luck and doesn't have anything to do with God.
No matter how much effort we put in, we don't make the team? Because the Arizona Cardinals management is dumb and doesn't realize that every poster on this forum is better than Carson Palmer. With a joke aside, it's called competition.
Don't get the job? Politics.
Unexpected things in life? Every person writes it's own destiny and besides that, there are so many factors to consider regarding that question.Comment -
The Bible came from the Catholic Church. The books of the Old Testament were written before Christianity, yes, but it the Catholic Church who put all those books together to make what we call today, the Holy Bible.
The Bible is not the authority of the Christian religion, the Catholic Church is and always has been. The Catholic Church existed well before anyone ever heard of the Bible.
The Catholic Church is the pillar of truth in Christianity not the Bible. Scripture even says so.
1 Timothy 3:15
Then you run into all sorts of other problems if you go strictly by the Bible instead of the true Church. For example....But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
Scripture being based on interpretation instead of the Catholic Church leads to confusion. For if I think your interpretation is wrong, I could simply start an entirely new protestant church based on my interpretations. This has been a disaster for protestants.
Today, there are over 1,000 protestant denominations. Which one has the correct teaching and authority to teach given by Christ Himself? The answer is none of them.
Then of course, if you go strictly by the Bible and that salvation depends upon the Bible you of course run into problems like....what happens to people that are illiterate? Not only now in the present time but in the past as well? Did God condemn to the Eternal Fire simply because they couldn't read?
What about the Christians who lived and existed in the time before the Bible came into existence? What happened to them? Were they also condemned because they did not have the Bible?
The answer to both questions is no because the Bible itself is not, has never been, nor at any point will ever be the authority in Christianity. Only the Catholic Church can make that claim.
There is only one true Church and only one true faith on this earth. It is Roman Catholic.Comment -
Comment -
Comment -
Philly, do you think before your write. How could the catholic church have existed before the bible. Think about that for a second. Tell me how that would be possible?Comment -
And by the way when you speak of the catholic church who exactly are you talking about. Most of the laws of the catholic church were decided upon by men, often the pope, and bishops. Now you do know that in early catholic history many popes not just one or two but many were extremely evil people. You are aware of this fact of history right? So what you are saying is that the bible which is supposed to be the basic structure of christianity takes a back seat to the laws written by in some cases extremely evil people. This is not my opinion it is a fact of history. Do you think at all about your opinions, ever???Comment -
“There was a time when religion ruled the world. It is known as the Dark Ages.”
― Ruth Hurmence GreenComment -
Wait, you really don't know this, are you serious. You are unaware of the evil of many popes and catholic hierarchy. I can't believe this, this is common historical knowledge. You don't know this, holy Christ. Philly do a search, I suggest start with the Medici family. Why in gods name to I even discuss anything with these people? why?, they know absolutely nothing about almost everything. How can anybody not know this?Comment -
What don't you understand?
Did you not read me correctly when I said this:
As you can see, I've already stated that the books of the bible were already in existence before they were put together to make the book we call the Holy Bible.The Bible came from the Catholic Church. The books of the Old Testament were written before Christianity, yes, but it the Catholic Church who put all those books together to make what we call today, the Holy Bible.
Really, what is it that you don't understand here?Comment
